Replies

If the South had won the War Between the States, (as I recall it described as a youth), it would have created Europe in North America. The Republic would have degenerated into a mass of bickering, war torn, parochial States. Do you really think that the 13 States of the Confederacy would have been it? I doubt it. Read the Federalist Papers. The Founders were well grounded in history when they established the Republic.

That said, I have more than a little sympathy with your view that the origins of the Leviathan can be traced in part to the War Between the States. But surely we can work to restore the Republic within the framework established by the Founders.

Oops, 11 States in the Confederacy. 13 original colonies. But I hope you get my point.

"That said, I have more than a little sympathy with your view that the origins of the Leviathan can be traced in part to the War Between the States."

Thank you for your sympathy. The War Between the States was the second battle of the American Revolution... the Republic of America lost. Empire won and what you refer to as "the Leviathan" was born. Our Federal Government became the Central Government and so it goes.

There is no bickering among the "Sovereign" states. Bickering is not allowed

A few comments...

First, 13 Confederate States cann be correct as Kentucky and Missouri each had representation in the Confederate Congress. They each had reps in two congresses at once including governors etc. That's why their were `13 stars on the Confederate flag.

I believe Maryland would have seceeded were a vote allowed. I base this opinion on the fact that Lincoln won less than 3 % of the popular vote in 1860, and Douglas, the other northern canidate won 6.5 %.

The reason I reject the term Civil War is a civil war is when two groups fight for the same government, like the Russian Civil War or the English Civil War. This was more properly defined a s a war of secession, like the American Revolution. Therefore, I believe the War For Soouthern Independence is less controversial and more accurate.

I don't know why people assume the CSA would break apart. It didn't. Even under the most trying circumstances, it stayed together throughout the war. Once the Mississippi was cut and the CSA was split into two, the Trans-Mississippi region fought as hard as any other part, and there was never any move to secession or separate peace. I don't get this argument that is argued in history clatches everywhere. While nothing lasts forever, I don't see why this government would be any less stable than any other. I think governments tend to get more powerful over time anyway.

The Republic is dead.

Long live the king.

Slavery was evil.

Nuff said.

(I'm a native Georgian who lives in Texas.)

"But surely we can work to restore the Republic within the framework established by the Founders."

Perhaps, but no one today seems to understand that framework. What do you do when everyone thinks the President has the power to wage war? What do you do when everyone thinks the Supreme Court has the authority to enact legislation? What do you do when everyone thinks the federal government has control over the inner workings of the states?

"But surely we can work to restore the Republic within the framework established by the Founders."

Perhaps, but no one today seems to understand that framework. What do you do when everyone thinks the President has the power to wage war? What do you do when everyone thinks the Supreme Court has the authority to enact legislation? What do you do when everyone thinks the federal government has control over the inner workings of the states?